On Apr 24, 2012 11:15 AM, "Daniel Shahaf" <danie...@elego.de> wrote: > > stef...@apache.org wrote on Sun, Apr 15, 2012 at 13:42:44 -0000: >... > > +++ subversion/trunk/subversion/libsvn_subr/svn_named_atomic.c Sun Apr 15 13:42:44 2012 > > @@ -88,6 +88,12 @@ > > */ > > #define SHM_NAME_SUFFIX "Shm" > > > > +/* Prevent macro re-definition warning (on Windows in particluar). > > + */ > > +#ifdef SYNCHRONIZE > > +#undef SYNCHRONIZE > > +#endif > > Is this a safe change? Experimenting shows that if later in the file > a macro is used which is defined in terms of SYNCHRONIZE, the file-local > definition (below the diff context) would be used even for macros > defined while the previous definition was effective. > > Shouldn't you rename the macro?
Agreed. Rename. Let's stick to our namespace, but failing that, at least choose other names when we discover a conflict. Cheers, -g
